Sharing the Wealth

[Deanh]

Fixed it for ya.

ok Ronnie...my award for POTW!...cudos...

[NickF1011]

unfortunately ask McCain and Obama if they want to ignore the "religious" voting pool.....one HINT of dis-respect or questioning ones religious beleifs and you better beleive the vote goes the other way....hell hath no fury as a brainwashed "bible basher"......beleive what you want to beleive,,,,but DO NOT impress yopur religious beleifs on me.....I wish religion WERE totally removed from politics, but those days are gone.......

 

It's not that I would ignore those who were religious. I just fail to see the relevency of that religion on what my political beliefs are.

[mettech]

Personally I think that the only way anything can be done in a reasonable amount of time is to, in this situation that we find ourselves, is to have a majority in both the Exec/Congress (to undo what the Rep majority did in the first six years of this century). For those uninformed, might I remind you that the Reps filibustered more than 90 times just in the last year, to keep anything that they didn't agree with-from even being discussed in the Senate. That cannot continue.

 

Let me remind you that even if you do not agree with any social changes that the Dems may, or may not make, they are not permanent, and can always be undone in the future - however, the attack on our rights and that of the Constitution of the current administration - well, rights are harder to get back once given up. McCain has yet to identify, expand, or quantify just how his policies would differ from Geo W - even though he has asked to do so countless times.

 

What is going to be interesting is what happens to the Rep party as many think that a civil war is about to happen within the Republican party - esp if it turns into a landslide. The so-called 'conservative' has changed rather drastically from the conservative of old. For example, in an effort to gain votes they have catered to the far right wing fundamentalist faction to the extent that CC Goldwater (grand-daughter of Sen Goldwater) wrote the following last week:

 

Those who feel compelled to push their own personal religious dogma/beliefs on others (such as abortion) are actually against the very principles of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, they are not even versed in the Bible and yet they profess to be on the side of "God's Word".

 

In reality there is really overwhelming evidence that these same people don't take time to read their own Bibles. People will listen to their pastors and to Christian radio broadcasters. They will skim through easy-to-read pamphlets and perhaps look up the one or two verses printed therein, but they don't actually read their Bibles and make up their own minds on issues such as abortion. They merely listen to others who quote a selected verse to support a view they heard from someone else.

 

One would think that those religious Pro-Lifers would actually refer to and actually READ the Bible (without just focusing on selected verses taken out of context). Doing so, one would find out that during the time that the Bible was written, blood was viewed as the life force, or the fluid that contained the life force--Leviticus 17 (v11 & 14). Even when the Bible was written they knew that this process did not occur (when the embryo is infused with blood) until 18-20 days after fertilization (not at the moment of fertilization). On one hand they believe/profess that the Bible is the actual "Word of God" - and then on the other hand -- they discard it.

 

Religious dogma/beliefs have no place in our government. It's a little thing called 'separation of church and state' that our founding fathers believed in - and so do I. There are many, many other ways that we can minimize abortion occurrence.

 

 

If someone could tell me at what heart beat the fetus becomes human, I would support abortion up to that point. :shades: Anyone?

 

 

Not all Pro-Lifers are religious. My family and I support no religion.

 

I just find it difficult supporting policies or people that defend killing a helpless child. :reading:

 

Or taxing me at a higher rate.

 

Or taking my guns from me.

 

Or most forms of Socialism. Excluding the helps.

[mikem12]

Actually just two, the House and Senate which are our direct(or supposed to be) representatives. They can override the third one.

 

Absoulutely,

 

Mike

[NickF1011]

If someone could tell me at what heart beat the fetus becomes human, I would support abortion up to that point. :shades: Anyone?

 

 

Not all Pro-Lifers are religious. My family and I support no religion.

 

I just find it difficult supporting policies or people that defend killing a helpless child. :reading:

 

Or taxing me at a higher rate.

 

Or taking my guns from me.

 

Or most forms of Socialism. Excluding the helps.

 

Well, isn't it socialist to dictate what a woman can or cannot do with her own body?

[Deanh]

If someone could tell me at what heart beat the fetus becomes human, I would support abortion up to that point. :shades: Anyone?

 

 

Not all Pro-Lifers are religious. My family and I support no religion.

 

I just find it difficult supporting policies or people that defend killing a helpless child. :reading:

 

Or taxing me at a higher rate.

 

Or taking my guns from me.

 

Or most forms of Socialism. Excluding the helps.

what are your thoughts on socialist medicine?.....

[sprinter]

Ah yes the greedy dumbocrats. They don't like your tax deferred 401k. And want a mandatory worker retirement program which will pay you 3%. Did I forget to tell you it run by the government? Lets do some math here; social security = bankrupt, new retirement program = ???? Looks like more wars and bridges.

 

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=...mp;pageId=79168

 

Democrats plan to tap your private retirement plan to fund Barack Obama's many promises to expand the power and size of the federal government.

 

Your pre-tax annual contribution to a 401(k) will be taxed under a plan considered by House Education and Labor Committee Chairman George Miller, D-Calif., and Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., chairman of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support.

 

Worse yet, instead of the familiar, tax-deferred plan which typically invests in diversified mutual funds, in turn investing in private companies, these Democrat leaders want to create a new system of mandatory worker-retirement accounts which would invest only in government debt (bonds) and yield 3 percent per year.

 

In other words, Miller and McDermott want to redirect trillions of dollars of workers' savings from private investments to fund the ballooning government deficit.

 

Of course this all depends upon if the greedy banksters leave us any crumbs.

[RangerM]

Well, isn't it socialist to dictate what a woman can or cannot do with her own body?

 

I'd say it's closer to fascism.

 

Does the father have rights to his unborn progeny? If not, what do you call that?

[mettech]

what are your thoughts on socialist medicine?.....

 

We have a form of it already.. Medicare & Medicaid... And it is for the helpless..

 

Several States have insurance for the poor and helpless too. Simular to Hoosier HealthWise.

[Ron W.]

ok Ron...my award for POTW!...cudos...

 

 

Geez, had to fix that one for you also??

[Deanh]

We have a form of it already.. Medicare & Medicaid... And it is for the helpless..

 

Several States have insurance for the poor and helpless too. Simular to Hoosier HealthWise.

got my veiws on that too, if it was for EVERYONE I would NOT have a problem...as it sits I look around at the Emergency ward at people getting FREE medical yet no-one will touch me unless i have proof of insurance, fill out various forms and wait for an hour or two......hint...it ties in with immigrants here not exactly legally....I have some doozie stories from an ex room-mate whom was an RN.....

[mettech]

Well, isn't it socialist to dictate what a woman can or cannot do with her own body?

 

Like prostitution ?

 

If I found a lost child... I believe that the responsibility of that child is mine until I find someone else that is responsible to care for the child. Even if it is an inconvenience.

[suv_guy_19]

Like prostitution ?

 

 

Yes actually. I'm really not sure why its still illegal in most places.

[Deanh]

Yes actually. I'm really not sure why its still illegal in most places.

legalized in New Zealand now, tourism went up.....arrests went down....

[napfirst]

Personally I think that the only way anything can be done in a reasonable amount of time is to, in this situation that we find ourselves, is to have a majority in both the Exec/Congress (to undo what the Rep majority did in the first six years of this century). For those uninformed, might I remind you that the Reps filibustered more than 90 times just in the last year, to keep anything that they didn't agree with-from even being discussed in the Senate. That cannot continue.

 

Let me remind you that even if you do not agree with any social changes that the Dems may, or may not make, they are not permanent, and can always be undone in the future - however, the attack on our rights and that of the Constitution of the current administration - well, rights are harder to get back once given up. McCain has yet to identify, expand, or quantify just how his policies would differ from Geo W - even though he has asked to do so countless times.

 

What is going to be interesting is what happens to the Rep party as many think that a civil war is about to happen within the Republican party - esp if it turns into a landslide. The so-called 'conservative' has changed rather drastically from the conservative of old. For example, in an effort to gain votes they have catered to the far right wing fundamentalist faction to the extent that CC Goldwater (grand-daughter of Sen Goldwater) wrote the following last week:

 

Those who feel compelled to push their own personal religious dogma/beliefs on others (such as abortion) are actually against the very principles of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, they are not even versed in the Bible and yet they profess to be on the side of "God's Word".

 

In reality there is really overwhelming evidence that these same people don't take time to read their own Bibles. People will listen to their pastors and to Christian radio broadcasters. They will skim through easy-to-read pamphlets and perhaps look up the one or two verses printed therein, but they don't actually read their Bibles and make up their own minds on issues such as abortion. They merely listen to others who quote a selected verse to support a view they heard from someone else.

 

One would think that those religious Pro-Lifers would actually refer to and actually READ the Bible (without just focusing on selected verses taken out of context). Doing so, one would find out that during the time that the Bible was written, blood was viewed as the life force, or the fluid that contained the life force--Leviticus 17 (v11 & 14). Even when the Bible was written they knew that this process did not occur (when the embryo is infused with blood) until 18-20 days after fertilization (not at the moment of fertilization). On one hand they believe/profess that the Bible is the actual "Word of God" - and then on the other hand -- they discard it.

 

Religious dogma/beliefs have no place in our government. It's a little thing called 'separation of church and state' that our founding fathers believed in - and so do I. There are many, many other ways that we can minimize abortion occurrence.

mere bloviation!

[Deanh]

mere bloviation!

not sure i agree....most individuals that consider themselves "religious" have a tendency to look down THEIR noses to those whom are not, or at least are not swayed by THEIR beleifs and principles....( I have first hand experience here as well....) beleive me , hypocrisy runs rampant in religious factions....

Edited October 27, 2008 by Deanh

[napfirst]

obama caught on tape advocating wealth redistribution!

[RaZor]

mere bloviation!

Sorry. . . that was a lot words right in a row -- in structured sentences and paragraphs, wasn't it?

 

Oh well, I only post once in a while . . . I have a life

[napfirst]

Sorry. . . that was a lot words right in a row -- in structured sentences and paragraphs, wasn't it?

 

Oh well, I only post once in a while . . . I have a life

words, sentences and paragraphs....yeah, that sums it up pretty good....and a life....that's good too...

[NickF1011]

I'd say it's closer to fascism.

 

Does the father have rights to his unborn progeny? If not, what do you call that?

 

The way I figure it, until men grow uteruses and can carry babies to term, it really isn't up to us. If women get together and decide to ban abortion, that's just fine with me. I just don't think men have any place deciding anything about it.

[Noah Harbinger]

Let's play Fill In The Blanks to Suit your Political Biases!

 

Anyone who knows tax law knows the federal tax system stopped being about funding the government, and all about social engineering a long time ago. The power to tax is the power to control.

 

The only "change" put forth by ______ is a repackaging of the same tired old ______ policies that never work.

[Noah Harbinger]

We have masked this decline by sending all the women out to work, contributing to the GDP, while large portions of the "Social Economy": cooking, childcare, housekeeping, sewing, are also moved into the money economy - further promoting the illusion of economic growth, when in fact real wealth is steadily declining, and has been for years. One economist put it simply: "You can't stop making things and expect to maintain your standard of living." To maintain the trappings of an increasingly untenable middle class existence, we work harder and harder and borrow more and more (with the financial industry happily devising new "instruments" and pushing easy credit under the noses of a regulatory system asleep at the wheel.) It is quite clear now who has benefited, who is going to benefit, and who is going to pay the price. And frankly, it makes me sick. Ok - both parties have been complicit in this, but I know which one's core values: "government regulation is bad" "taxes are bad" "taxing the wealthiest and corporations will hamper economic growth" feed most strongly into this problem. In my estimation. And I will vote accordingly.

 

I give your post a ...

 

 

... Gold Star for Excellence!

[AAISkinsFan]

obama caught on tape advocating wealth redistribution!

 

McCain in person advocating

 

Spin that...take a napfirst. Looks like you'll lose no matter how you vote.

[RangerM]

The way I figure it, until men grow uteruses and can carry babies to term, it really isn't up to us. If women get together and decide to ban abortion, that's just fine with me. I just don't think men have any place deciding anything about it.

 

I understand the opinion, but that's the easy answer.

 

Conception occurs due to the actions of two people of equal importance, no matter who carries to term. Both play a part; both bear responsibility; and both should have a say in the outcome. If not, then should the male also not have the freedom to choose and/or to support his (unwanted) child?

 

You may not share my views on morality, but assuming you consider yourself a moral person I would ask, if you are the father, and the woman obtains an abortion, are you complicit? In the absence of God, I can understand that complicity is irrelevant, however since morality cannot be based on anything other than belief in a higher power, then does this mean there is nothing immoral about abortion? (NOTE: For those who wish to challenge the morality/higher power part of that last statement I'll ask. How can right/wrong be a fixed point, if it is up to the subjective judgement of the individual? If morality, in other words right/wrong, are not 'fixed points' then the terms are meaningless.)

 

Now before you ask the question, I am not prepared to put a doctor/female in jail for performing/obtaining an abortion, which I guess means that I believe that the procedure should remain legal. The fact that I 'tolerate' its existence does not mean that I support it. I will just say that I believe that abortion is just another example of the evil that exists in this world, and it will continue to exist, no matter what those like me think. I can only conduct myself according to my beliefs.

 

Others here have disdained those like me who use their sense of right/wrong (religious based) to sway public policy. I'll make a deal with you. I will agree to withold my morality on all things political, when you withold yours. This means no Federally-financed welfare, socialized medicine, or any other Federal policy intended to provide "social justice". If one man's morality has no place in Federal policy, then no man's does.

Edited October 28, 2008 by RangerM

[fordxer]

so you're saying only democrats raise taxes. only democrats. republicans are sweethearts with only your best interest at heart?? they lower taxes, give out guns at street corners, protect unborn babies, the country is in fincancial shambles and bush and company are just victims of those bad, bad democrats???....wow, the republicans ARE GREAT!!!

 

congress or not, the agendas that bush pushed for were put into place. his desires for this country were rubber stamped.

Pelosi and Reid said they were going to change all of these things. What happened. Those two would rather sit back and let the country go to hell in a hand basket and blame everyone else rather than do something constructive and turn it around. But then if they did something to stop the economic down slide, Barry Hussein (oops, sorry, we are not supposed to use that name) would have to look for other campaign personnel after his advisors were taken away due to the fact that the leaders and followers of Fannie & Freddie are mostly to blame for the mess. And it also means that there would have to be special elections to replace Barnie Franks and Chris Dodd for their involvement as well.